About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
CSPAN 16
CSPAN2 14
CNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
LANGUAGE
English 32
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)
is the in recess for their weekly party caucuses. they will return at 2:15 for more work on then line sales tax bill. a motion to proceed on the bill could come tomorrow unless an agreement is reached today. learn more about your senators with c-span's 2013 congressional direct at this. it is available to order online. a handy guide to the current congress. has information about each member of the hoist and senate. it includes contact information, district maps and committee asassignments. the directory is 12.95 plus shipping and handling and order online. a short time ago we spoke with a capitol hill reporter with the latest on the legislation the senate is debating today on the internet sales tax. gautham nagesh from roll call on capitol hill. what is the purpose of this internet sales bill? >> it would require states online retailers, charge sales tax and collect and remit them when consumers make a purchase online. that includes retailers not within their own state. >> who are some of the bill's supporters and why do some of them say it will level the playing field for retailers? >> well, t
of the fact that policy is our means, and they are not ends. we think we were for the court taxes or spending restraint, but those are policies we advocate. they're not what we're really for. what we're for are the good things that these policies will yield to the american people. what we're really for is the kind of society that those policies would allow the american people to create -- together. there is one idea too often missing from our public debate, it is that idea, together. in the last few years we conservatives seem to have abandoned words like together, compassion, and community, as if they're only possible meanings were as some sort of secret code for stateism. collective action does not only or even usually mean government action. conservatives cannot surrender the idea of community to the left when it is the vitality of our committees upon which our entire philosophy ultimately depends. nor can we allow one politician's occasional conflation of compassion and bigger government to discourage us from emphasizing the moral code of our world view. conservatism ultimately is not abo
the taxes, pay the fine, learn english, have a your. it is not going to be easy. they have to earn their way. those were the basic principles that started the conversation. i think there were 24 meetings that took place as we came together for some times for hours at great thronte talk about this 800-page bill. it is not perfect but it is a good faith approach to fixing a badly broken immigration system. there's many reasons we're here. first, american people want us to do something. the notion that we would end this process with the same broken immigration system is unacceptable. we believe we came up with a good approach that will make this country safer and more productive. second, i want to say something about an issue that touches my heart because i've been working on it for more than 12 years. that's the dream at. this is an issue that means to word to me and to so many people across the country. i thank to thank my colleagues here because the meeting we set aside for the dream act everyone said it is time. it is time. it is nojust time becae it is a good idea and there's wisdom behind
, cutting spending in the tax code, and then i think it also keeps our promises to people to seniors who worked hard their whole life and want to nothing more than a secure retirement. and to our veterans to 0 who we made promises as they donned the uniform and fought for our country. >> host: what about the issue of changed cpi. . >> guest: i start with a basic notion that social security has enci ad itbutedp our shben ttal n part of the discussion. certainly we need to be concerned about the long-term solvent sei of social security but again when retirement security is question mark for so many families. i don't think it should be on the table during this part of the discussion during the budget resolution. look at the real contributors to our deficit and debt as we try tackle those challenges. >> host: two final questions before we go to calls. callers are ready. this is another article during an intimate dinner with democratic senators. how come you were left off the list? [laughter] >> guest: i have no idea. [laughter] but i have been very pleased with the president's increase in ou
the u.s. senate returns to work. debate on the internet sales tax bill. at 2:15 eastern. that's on c-span2 and now to the house floor here on c-span. the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of the universe, we give you thanks for giving us another day. the house returns from a long weekend meeting with constituents as our nation continues to process of the impact of dramatic explosions in boston and texas. concerns about budget, taxes, immigration, gun violence, among others, reveal the considerable divisions both in congress and among the american populous as well. as opinions and emotions surge loudly and with little indication of easy solution, we take this quiet moment to ask your blessing upon the members of this people's house. give each member peace and quiet discernment to work toward common solutions that might ease our divisions and open the way to new hope and confidence that we as a nation will continue to shine as an example for all the world to immolate. may all that is done th
paying fines, back taxes, that is not amnesty or not nothing. a lots of money. some people may be so rich they think a couple thousand dollars is nothing, but it is not for most people. with earned legal status, you see it in the center-right movement. i see the business community, the small businesses in particular, this is not a fortune 500 issue. farmers and dairymen and ranchers around the country have been explaining that they need this. you see this with the various communities. communities ofs faith are focused on this and saying that we need to move forward on this. from the center-right perspective in terms of the reagan republicans and conservatives, absolutely, yes. it is very powerful. the arguments against it are malice in the left and do not carry a lots of weight with reagan republicans. what are the things i used in my testimony with the nine mins of -- nine myths of immigration, this is back in the 1980 posturing reagan's presidency. it walks through all the things you hear from people who did not like the irish and did not like the jews and did not like the asians and al
in the shadows -- republicans said they have to earn their way on that path. pay their taxes. have a job. learn english. it will not be easy. they have to earn their way. those are the basic principles that started this conversation. i think there were about money for meetings that took place as it came together to talk about all of the issues that are part of this 800 less page bill. it is not perfect, but it is a good faith, common sense approach to fixing a badly broken immigration system. there are several reasons why we are here and why i'm here. first, the american people want us to do something. the notion that we would and this process with the same broken immigration system is unacceptable. we believe that we have come up with a good approach, one that would make the country safer and more. second, i want to talk about an issue that touches my heart. that is the dream act. this is an issue which means the world to me and to many young people across this country. i want to thank my colleagues. the evening that we set aside for the dream act was a short meeting. everyone said it was time
taxes. this year raising taxes $600 billion. but there was never an agreement as part of the sequester or the budget control act to raise taxes so that's where we have a lawyer at. this is the problem so in the debate and i remember sitting up when the president guaranteed the american people that the sequester wouldn't hap but it is happening. it's happeningright now. it's infil all. the house has proposed a budget that eliminates the cuts on the defense department but finds other cuts in the government to replace them with. the president is saying he wants to eliminate the sequester. he apparently indicates that he does, that he wants to do that raising taxes and that is a nonstarter. under the current debt path we are increasing spending every year. the difficulty as i pointed out before our committee so many times is half of the reductions in spending and in the sequester follow in defe which lyup onixt entour rn so that is a disproportionate cut. as you talk to congress about the difficulties, i suggest that you go to 1600 pennsylvania avenue and talk to the president, the command
by 50% in five years, but our tax revenue remained the same. hadmember one time we arrested somebody for selling cocaine on a playground. the person arrested was in the country illegally. it took our detectives five hours to determine who he was a trick he had five social security cards. illegal immigration does not only affect people on the southern border. 40% of the people in the country illegally did not cross the border. they came on a visa, the visa expires, and they do not go home. it is nearly impossible for law enforcement to determine who they are talking to it, to determine someone's past. for a minimal amount of money, you can get an entire new identity. we have an immigration law tw reasons. one, to protect our national security, and, too, to protect american jobs. the proposal of the senate gang of eight violates both of those principles. it will make our borders less secure, and jobs harder to find at a time when 22 million americans cannot find work. by offering a pathway to citizenship, by offering amnesty, or what i like to college, temporary amnesty in definitely,
to the budget. the republicans are going to want more tax cuts -- more spending cuts, and the democrats are going to want more tax increases, and i think you'd end up with something that is about 50/50 but that would really be both of them would want to be the pair that solved the yawning budget gap. so, and, you know, i look at my governor, mitch daniels, who i served under -- who's a republican, and he came this and, you know, he -- it was so important for him to change things, to shake things up and -- health care. he pushed an expansion of our medicaid program. with a cigarette tax increase. my god, that sounds pretty democratic. but it, you know, he wanted to leave a legacy with health care. and the one thing that made it republican was it had the health savings account approach. but any, all the other elements -- expanding medicaid to include working adults who didn't have kids and funding with the cigarette tax -- that comes out of the democratic playbook. so, and even our new governor, mike pence, who headed the republican study group when he was a hebb of congress which is -- m
workers pay payroll taxes into a trust fund. all employers pay the same payroll tax into that trust fund and out of that trust fund comes all of the spending or part a services primarily hospital insurance spending. the age i trust funds has exceeded revenue since 2007 and what that means it is the balance of the trust fund and the assets of the trust fund have been declining and they will be totally completed sometime in the middle of the next decade. since the trust fund can't borrow if the laws are changed medicare will be unable to pay full payments for charges in the age i trust fund. it will only be able to reimburse providers 85% of what they are charging. so clearly legislative action has to be made before that he either to raise taxes or slow the growth in spending or preferably a little bit of both. i my reckoning i have completed my assignment and rather than take a gold star as i said i want to have a couple of general observations. the first when we have discussiodiscussio ends like this we should make clear what our goal this. if our goal is to moderate the growth of medica
put your finger on what we are trying to stay thougertain tax -- certairorize us some kid gets sin street and that terrorizes me because i live here. but that definition in webster has a connection to all legal definitions in that it is a political act. and generally, a political act against noncombatants. one military unit shoots another military unit. that is regular warfare. but when you intentionally attacked civilians for a political purpose, i think everybody agrees that was terrorism we have several elements here in boston. what we do not yet know is whether there was a political purpose. we are assuming there was, but we do not know they're wet -- that for a fact yet. host: someone on twitter reminds us that it was a pressure cooker believed to contain the bomb. likean see what this looks in the new york daily news. what is significant about this to you as we talk about such an easily homemade, crude instrument. guest: ball bearings, nails, pressure kircher ramallah -- pressure cooker, items you can go by this afternoon. look at what timothy mcveigh used, diesel fuel and fe
. you've heard that the first quarter was tough. probably payroll tax impacted more than anything else. and small business is -- and big business for that matter is totally the flux with the obama care act and what it all means. and business is looking at part-time, that you've got to keep people under 30 hours. they don't want to employ more than 50 people. and nobody really knows how this thing is going to work. now, as far as the japanese yen, every major manufacturer in the world has made a strategic decision to produce where they sell. no manufacturer can deal with the volatility in exchange rates. and if you look at where the japanese are today compared to 10, 20 years ago, there is no comparison with let's say 80% produced in north america. so the exchange rate has been dramatically reduced as a factor in our business. and at the moment, i don't see any impact. >> okay, mike, $42. we've been friends a long time. you couldn't tell me at four bucks that that was something i should -- actually, we're not allowed to do it, anyway, but you couldn't have mentioned that back in 2008 or
as well would be people point to kennedy in reducing taxes and actually growing the economy as well as reducing unemployment as well as increasing i think revenue actually increased and he cut rates so i would probably say kennedy. i think kennedy captured the american imagination somewhat. i think falsely sometimes because the media gave him a pass and nowadays i don't think that would happen to either side but i guess i would say kennedy. >> you spoke at howard university last week. do you plan on doing any more outrage and if so what will you do next? >> about three days later i spoke to simmons college which is a historically black college. i thought my receptionist howard was much better than the reception by the left-wing media. i didn't appreciate your reception at howard i think was very fair. i never met curt schmoke before but i was the fan. i've told them i remember back when he was mayor writing about him trying to decriminalize penalties for nonviolent crime which i have always been a supporter of and so i enjoyed meeting curt schmoke. we have the bill on mandatory mini
control act agreement to raise taxes. the president did raise taxes $600 billion, there was never an agreement to raise taxes. so that's where we've got a loggerhead. this is the problem. at the end of debate i remember when the president guaranteed the american people sequester wouldn't happen. but it is happening. it's happening right now in the law. the house has proposed a budget that eliminates cuts on the defense department, besides other cuts to replace them when. the president is saying he wants to eliminate the sequester are apparently indicates he does, but he wants to do it raising taxes and that is a nonstarter. under our current day, we increase spending every year. the difficulty is that pointed out before our committee so many times is half the reductions in spending and sequester file on the defense department come which only make ucmj six of the spending in our government. that is a disproportionate cut. as you talk to congress about the disabilities, i suggest you go to 1600 pennsylvania avenue and talk to the president, commander-in-chief. i am very worried beca
into vbms. the veteran will go online, which exists today, file their claim, like their taxes -- apropos to say that today -- it goes directly into vbms, and we completed that whole piece this year in january, without advertising it. we have 500 claims a week going into the system, directly into vbms, and allows us to work them.it never turns into paper. today we have 3% electronic.-- we do not have three percent in paper anymore. we have 14% of our paper that has been converted to electronic since january.i have more than 116,000 electronic claims now, electronic folders, that we did not have at the beginning of this year, so we're moving along in the process. this week i will have another six offices on the new i.t. system. >> thank you. >> mr. secretary, the v.a. backlog reduction plan shows in order to eliminate it by 2015, v.a. will need to decide 1.2 million claims this year, 1.6 million next year, and 1.9 million claims in 2015. v.a. is saying it will decide 335,000 fewer claims in 2013 and 2014.that is in the budget submission. can the v.a. reach 2 million claims in 2015? that wo
illegal, in order to become citizens, have a path to citizenship would have to pay back taxes and pay fines, learn english, and get in the become of the line behind those who are come here legally, the majority of our american citizens want that as a way to be the nation that we are. a judo christian principle nation that reaches out and helps those who need the kind of help these people need. they did break our laws by coming here illegal but the fact is now it's time to give them a leg legal status and a tough opportunity but an opportunity to become citizens of this country. >> senators john mccain and chuck schumer, thank you very much, gentlemen. we look forward to seeing you again. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we will bring our round table next with reverend sharpton and tina brown and mark halpern and david gregory. stay with us. tomorrow's show rahm emmanuel will be with us. and coming up is former attorney general jon ashcroft on the boston terror attacks. with the spark miles card from capital one, bjorn earns unlimited rewards for his small business. take these bags to ro
't been up front with my taxes. this would prevent d.h.s. from say sharing that information with the internal revenue service? guest: the private companies in sharing information, the biggest concern is -- individuals are concerned that their private information within the cyber networks or systems would be held by private companies but then provided to the government, that this private information would not be stripped by the companies first. in the president's executive order, the onus would be on the privacy advocates. companiesthe private to strip any private information that might be caught up within the context of cyber threat information. first one has to understand the definition of cyber threat. it is unlikely but not impossible that your private tax information, your e-mail content would be part of that information that is a cyber threat information that would be given to the government. is there a possibility that it would be lumped in with that? yes. so whose responsibility is it to minimize and get rid of your private information? the bill does not allow the gov
request is woefully late and full of gimmicks, tax increases, generally unhelpful, but we will persevere. let me begin by taking the opportunity to thank the members of the military for their service, their sacrifice that you are representing here today. as this subcommittee has done in the past, we want to reaffirm our commitment to providing our war fighters with the tools, the training, the equipment and the support necessary to carry out vital security missions throughout the world. appreciation for the members of the military and their service can't be overstated. with continued instability in the middle east and northern africa, to the evolving challenges in the asia pacific region, especially north korea, there's no question that those who serve under our flag these days are doing so during a very critical period in our history. world events often remind us that our country, our freedom, our way of life remain a constant risk and we must take measured steps to protect the values that we hold. in this volatile world, increasingly, we are facing enemies both foreign and domestic. we
program activities, which covers the entire extent. every one of those had to be equally taxed. the congress imposed a more onerous, morerestrictiverra money from ppa to ppa.my ato m i have these small but not a lot oney anof them are only people. for whatever reason, they decided there needed to be more control over the national intelligence program. the effect of the fy 13 appropriations i did help as assume that it allowed us to move some money around city could move the money into the pot sorority committed to by virtue the fact we are fragments months of the fiscal year before regarded though. it would've been a disaster without it. the downside to allow start, which was good, but for most accounts with three specific exceptions, which i can't discuss here, with less money at the end of the day with the appropriations act and the impact of sequestration was doubled because we had to take and 79, said the rail cut fares about her 10%. >> the realistic impact is helpful. it provided a context to things they might be allowed to do. we have a macro issue of the sequestration,
that covers the entire extent. every one of those had to be eat late taxed. the congress imposed a more onerous, more restrict it from a comma rules that on my ability to move money from ppa to ppa. i have small pdas with not a lot of money but for whatever reason decided there needed to be more over the national intelligence program. the effect of the fy 13 of her rations that did help us in that it allowed us to move money around civic and that the money into the path we are committed to by virtue of the fact were five men in before we got a bill. sowo ba dister t it. a cab structure, did allow new start,t also frommocountschss here was what many at the endf the day and of course the of sequestration was doubled because we had to take it in seven months. iraq i was. ealistic impact. >> that is helpful because it provides more of a context of things we might be able to do. again, we have a macro issue of sequestration can watch everyone recognizes it's in packs on your programs. but i stand legislative authorization not on this committee that the intelligence that could have the skinny
of it comes from the drug trade. some probably 35 or 40%. some money comes from illicit taxes from afghan people and some money comes from external support from outside the region. >> when you look at the places that they go in pakistan, the frontier areas, double pakistan, -- do you believe pakistan, number one, has control over those areas and number two, can control over those areas? >> senator, pakistan does not have control over those areas right now. they have had over 15,000 killed and wounded in operations in that area over the past decade. they've had hundreds killed and wounded in the past several weeks as they've tried to gain control in the khyber area. i think that's a clear indication they cannot control the border area and the taliban that are operating freely inside of that border area. >> what do you see as a rule for the taliban, if any, in the future afghan government as we transition out, as discussions are taking place. how do you envision that future afghan government? obviously there are elections coming up but how are we looking at the transition for the afghan gov
of it comes from the drug trailed. some probably 35 or 40%. some money comes from illicit taxes from afghan people and some money comes from external support from outside the region. >> when you look at the places that they go in pakistan, the frontier areas, double pakistan, number one, has control over those areas and number two, can control over those areas? >> senator, pakistan does not have control over those areas right now. they have had over 15,000 killed and wounded in operations in that area over the past decade. they've had hundreds killed and wounded in the past kefrl weeks that is -- as they've tried to gain control in the khyber area. i think that's a clear indication they cannot control the border area and the taliban that are operating freely inside of that border area. >> what do you see as a rule for the taliban, if any, in the future afghan government as we transition out, as discussions are taking place. how do you envision that future afghan government? obviously there are elections coming up but how are we looking at the transition for the afghan government? >> the sta
in cyberspace, and are widely believed already to be responsible for some such a tax. china and russia possess formidable capabilities for cyber theft, such as the theft of valuable intellectual property as well as the more traditional areas of espionage, such as spying on our military weapon systems, plans and capabilities. china in particular appears to observe no limit of the theft of american commercial technology. that's cyber theft as a threat that cannot be tolerated. i hope we'll hear from our witnesses about the extent of the problem, and the steps that we can and should take to counter it. the asia-pacific region, another round of belligerence from the dictatorial regime in north korea has caused concern here in the united states, and among our allies in the pacific. that regime has announced its intention to resume a plutonium production, has tested a nuclear device in february that appears to have had a greater yield than previous tests. and has threatened at any time to launch a missile that uld further exacerbatenons. we have read about conflicting intelligence assessments, north
the last four months and even years before that debating issues like taxes, spending, and health care, but the number-one responsibility of the federal government is to keep the american people safe and secure. our response to this attack must be firm and unequivocal. we must send a clear message that we will never compromise our value or our freedom in the face of terrorist violence. we must stay on the offensive against the enemies of civilization and remain vigilant in our day-to-day lives. the victims of boston deserve nothing less. madam president, i yield the floor. and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: i ask that the calling of the quorum be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the senate will resume consideration of s. 649, which the clerk will report. the clerk: s. 649, a bill to ensure that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the national inst
reducing taxes have actually growing the economy as well as reducing unemployment, as well as, you know, increasing i think reverend actually increased even though he cut rates. so i would probably say kennedy. i think kennedy also captured the american imagination somewhat. i think falsely sometimes though because the media gave him a pass. nowadays i don't think that would happen. on either side. but i guess i would say kennedy among the once since i've been living. >> senator, you spoke at the university last week. how do you think your message was received there? do you plan on doing any more outreach like that? if so, what would you do differently? >> about three days late i spoke to simmons college which is historically a black college in louisville. i thought my reception at howard was much better than the left wing media. so if you're here from the left wing media, i didn't appreciate your recession. by howard i think was very fair. i had never met kurt schmoke before but i've always been a fan of kurt schmoke. i told that i could remember back and probably when he was mayor, re
possessed in this country? and who would pay for it? would gun owners be subject to still more fees or taxes for exercising their second amendment rights? who would have access to the so-called registry? would the public know who owns guns and who does not? who would ensure that this sensitive information is protected and not used for political purposes, and how? we do not know the answers to these questions, but we do know that such restrictions will not prevent the next tragedy. we should not start down this dangerous road. what should we do instead? i have a few suggestions. instead of undermining the second amendment, mr. president, congress should focus its attention on three areas. first, i believe that robust prosecution of violent criminals is the best deterrent for violent crime. prosecutors should punish to the fullest extent of the law individuals who misuse guns, knives or anything else to commit violent crimes. there should be no leniency, mr. president, what ever for the commission of such crimes. secondly, we should examine and address any deficiencies -- and we have them -- i
information is accurate? --t tax for things that can make or --ak our educational system creativity, relevance, technology, teachers. without funding, the educational system is worthless. school systems have to look at budgets and say what can make that? they will not cut math out of the curriculum. they will not cut reading. so they end up cutting the things we think of as esxtras -- cal education,uysicaysi resources that might be educational -- that might be essential to some kids think successful. like this is chelsea and she is a special ed student. >> i have dyslexia. . go to a special at school without it, i would be in trouble because they help me with my dyslexia. if you cut the funds i want to be able to learn from early in my future will be in jeopardy. >> mr. president, every day there are millions of kids are struggling i need help, mr. president. >> dear mr. president, they need your help. please take this. polity education is a major issue in america and must be addressed. it is spinning out of control. the drive america's odense and their contributions to society are in your han
and then eliminate the deficit through two ways. one is increasing the amount of revenue coming through tax policy, or reduce the amount of expenditures by cutting back on expenses and spending or some combination of those two. i believe that the most credible way is through what we call a balanced approach. >> john boehner, republican speaker of the house, emphasizes that spending cuts are the most important and effective way to solve the debt problem. >> republicans want to solve this problem by getting the spending line down. the chart depict what i have said for long time. washington has a spending probleatixed withax incaseslone. he wants to keep chasing higher spending with higher taxes. this chart will look a lot worse. our kids and our grandkids are the ones who are going to because washington was too shortsighted to fix the problem. >> the younger generation will suffer from this issue in the future. >> if we don't solve the national debt problem, eventually they're going to cut more government services, and one of the cuts will be education. >> we should invest in education. it has to be
every bill is too big and every deal tends to be today. so for example, like on tax reform, tomorrow i would lower the income tax. if we can compromise on the number i would lower it to 17% tomorrow. just do it. i don't care if people predicted less revenue, less revenue means more revenue in economy. if you in an enormous boost to ththe con and we like under kennedy, like under coolidge and like under reagan when you reduced rates, sometimes you get more revenue. that is because the deal is to be. same with immigration. we make it harder on ourselves are the debt commission, we make it a lot harder to find a deal when it has a thousand moving parts but i think we should go with the things we agree on and boom, boom, boom. it's why the rate -- that's why the public is so upset with us. all the stuff we agree on we won't pass because we say that will be the sweeter for the bigger deal. which we never seem to be able to get to one that break up all these big deals into smaller deals? i tried to pass the stand these a, science and technology these is expanding those. i tried to pass it by
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)